Gratuities Are Going Up Again, Effective 11.11.2023

[PhillyFan33579]

Just now, broberts said:

 

An absolutely ridiculous assertion. Many people work in jobs that treat them unfairly and pay them poorly. To argue otherwise denies reality.

 

 

Are these employees working in their native country? 

 

The suggestion that living wage should be gauged by the standards of their country of origin is obviously flawed. Their cost of living bears no relation to that location.

 

The only way cruise lines get away with paying the wages they do for most “service” related positions is because the wages are significantly higher than what a crew member can earn in their home country. The reason why you never see US employees working on cruise ships, outside of entertainment related positions, is because people can earn significantly more working in the US. 
 

I don’t agree with the removing gratuities crowd, but you cannot ignore the significance of what a crew member can make on a ship compared to what they could make working in their home country. 

[not-enough-cruising]

6 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

An absolutely ridiculous assertion. Many people work in jobs that treat them unfairly and pay them poorly. To argue otherwise denies reality.

 

 

Are these employees working in their native country? 

 

The suggestion that living wage should be gauged by the standards of their country of origin is obviously flawed. Their cost of living bears no relation to that location.

 

Ok, let’s use their place of work as an indicator of living wage. 
$0 housing 

$0 food 

$0 transportstion

$0 for anything 

 

In this instance they are paid WELL above living wage. 
 

The entire world bases living wage based on the place wages are being spent of the individual in question. Refusal to accept this as fact just means there can be no further fruitful discussion on the matter. 

 

[broberts]

15 minutes ago, time4u2go said:

Then what location do you think should be used in determining their cost of living?  Their cost of living on the ship is zero.  If not their home country, then where?

 

That is a difficult question. Perhaps some calculation based on the ports of calland. Taking into account included accommodation, meals, and medical.

 

While a number of living costs are included in living aboard, not all are and staff do go ashore, have expenses while travelling to/from an assignment, etc.

 

I have to wonder why service charges keep going up if staff are so well paid?

[time4u2go]

1 minute ago, broberts said:

 

That is a difficult question. Perhaps some calculation based on the ports of calland. Taking into account included accommodation, meals, and medical.

 

While a number of living costs are included in living aboard, not all are and staff do go ashore, have expenses while travelling to/from an assignment, etc.

 

I have to wonder why service charges keep going up if staff are so well paid?

They don't live at the ports of call.  They may get off the ship to buy a few items, or just as a break, but it's not like they have to pay for a place to live or even for food.  They don't even have to get off the ship.

 

Their "accomodation, meals, and medical" are all free to them on the ship, paid for by the cruise line.

 

The cruise line pays for them to travel to and from their assignments.

 

I think many of us are also wondering why service charges keep going up.  Many suspect that some of that money isn't going to the staff.

[yogimax]

2 minutes ago, time4u2go said:

They don't live at the ports of call.  They may get off the ship to buy a few items, or just as a break, but it's not like they have to pay for a place to live or even for food.  They don't even have to get off the ship.

 

Their "accomodation, meals, and medical" are all free to them on the ship, paid for by the cruise line.

 

The cruise line pays for them to travel to and from their assignments.

 

I think many of us are also wondering why service charges keep going up.  Many suspect that some of that money isn't going to the staff.

Please describe their “accommodation” which you attribute great value to.

[time4u2go]

4 minutes ago, yogimax said:

Please describe their “accommodation” which you attribute great value to.

Their room on the ship.  There's YouTube videos showing what they look like if you want to see.

 

I never attributed any value to their accommodations.  I pointed out that the crew does not pay for them.

 

Edited November 6, 2023 by time4u2go

[yogimax]

3 minutes ago, time4u2go said:

Their room on the ship.  There's YouTube videos showing what they look like if you want to see.

Afraid of directly answering the question I see.

 

bunk beds... shared cabin

no windows

120 square feet

Wow, that’s sure luxurious!

 

 

 

[not-enough-cruising]

31 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

I have to wonder why service charges keep going up if staff are so well paid?

You have to wonder?? Seriously?? 

[time4u2go]

14 minutes ago, yogimax said:

Afraid of directly answering the question I see.

 

bunk beds... shared cabin

no windows

120 square feet

Wow, that’s sure luxurious!

 

 

 

What question do you want me to answer?  You said you wanted me to describe the accommodations.  I referred you to YouTube videos where they are described.  Would you like me to transcribe what the crew members say in the videos?  I NEVER said the accommodations were luxurious.  I certainly wouldn't want to live in one of those rooms.

 

None of this changes the fact that for these crew members, the cost of living on a cruise ship is zero.

 

Edited November 6, 2023 by time4u2go

[not-enough-cruising]

10 minutes ago, yogimax said:

Afraid of directly answering the question I see.

 

bunk beds... shared cabin

no windows

120 square feet

Wow, that’s sure luxurious!

 

 

 

Luxury does not enter the equation. 
 

In these calculations, it is FREE room and board. Nothing more 

[nelblu]

1 hour ago, PhillyFan33579 said:

The reason why you never see US employees working on cruise ships, outside of entertainment related positions, is because people can earn significantly more working in the US. 

They would never put up with the hours required.🤣

[Ocean Boy]

1 hour ago, PhillyFan33579 said:

The whole nexus behind removing gratuities is financially based. To think otherwise is short sighted. 

Still has nothing to do with what one can, or cannot, afford. To think otherwise is short sighted.

[broberts]

1 hour ago, time4u2go said:

None of this changes the fact that for these crew members, the cost of living on a cruise ship is zero.

 

That is akin to saying that cruise passengers have no costs over the fare. As the subject of this thread indicates, clearly not accurate.

 

Are staff provided with off duty clothing, luggage, toiletries, grooming, entertainment, legal services, communications with family, personal computing and communication devices at no charge? Just a few things we all include in our lives.

 

[time4u2go]

1 hour ago, not-enough-cruising said:

Luxury does not enter the equation. 
 

In these calculations, it is FREE room and board. Nothing more 

Exactly!

[mek]

1 hour ago, broberts said:

 

That is akin to saying that cruise passengers have no costs over the fare. As the subject of this thread indicates, clearly not accurate.

 

Are staff provided with off duty clothing, luggage, toiletries, grooming, entertainment, legal services, communications with family, personal computing and communication devices at no charge? Just a few things we all include in our lives.

 

OK so let's have cruise ships pay a "living wage," (whatever the heck that means), and have cruise prices skyrocket to the point where only the truly affluent can afford to cruise = less ships, less jobs - not only the crew, but in all resources related to the cruise industry.

I can't wait to hear the outcry about that.

[broberts]

14 minutes ago, mek said:

OK so let's have cruise ships pay a "living wage," (whatever the heck that means), and have cruise prices skyrocket to the point where only the truly affluent can afford to cruise = less ships, less jobs - not only the crew, but in all resources related to the cruise industry.

I can't wait to hear the outcry about that.

 

😂 Let's see if I understand the logic.

 

Pay the US$18 / day or cruises will become unaffordable? Illogical.

 

Or is the argument that we should take advantage of employees so that our cruises cost less? Immoral.

 

 

[mek]

16 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

😂 Let's see if I understand the logic.

 

Pay the US$18 / day or cruises will become unaffordable? Illogical.

 

Or is the argument that we should take advantage of employees so that our cruises cost less? Immoral.

 

 

It's not the $18 that is the issue.  It's the argument that the crew is exploited by the cruise lines and using the costs of living where they are from is not valid.

Totally ridiculous to not accept that in general, they are making much more on a ship than they would at home. To use pay standards for any other countries is pointless.

Most of us are not objecting to tipping the crew - as long as they are providing the services we have had in the past.  But when the cruise lines reduce services and expect us to pay more in gratuities, then some are balking at that.

I personally have a problem with tipping the behind the scenes staff - but that is an issue I have with things besides cruising.

While there may be a few who don't tip to reduce the cost of their cruise, I don't think that applies to the vast majority of cruisers. 

 

[dianajo67]

4 hours ago, not-enough-cruising said:

Ok, let’s use their place of work as an indicator of living wage. 
$0 housing 

$0 food 

$0 transportstion

$0 for anything 

 

In this instance they are paid WELL above living wage. 
 

The entire world bases living wage based on the place wages are being spent of the individual in question. Refusal to accept this as fact just means there can be no further fruitful discussion on the matter. 

 

Virtually every staff member I’ve talked to is married and has a family with children or elderly parents they are responsible for back home.  A living wage isn’t just about the employee.  It’s about the employee and his/her dependents in this case.  Most of these folks are trading time away from their loved ones for the ability to hopefully improve the standard of living for their children back home.  Some may even want to send their kids to college someday.  I’m retired Air Force.  Based on the logic I’m seeing in this thread, I should not be paid when I am deployed because I’m being provided a place to eat and sleep.  Very narrow views that folks should just be happy with the potentially squalid living in their homelands and not be compensated for “deploying” in such a way they can have an improved life once returning home.  Also, who says they don’t own homes they are paying for back “home?”

 

BTW.  Staff do pay for things such as internet, phone calls etc.

Edited November 6, 2023 by dianajo67

[time4u2go]

2 minutes ago, dianajo67 said:

 Based on the logic I’m seeing in this thread, I should not be paid when I am deployed because I’m being provided a place to eat and sleep.

I honestly don't understand how you came to this conclusion. I'm pretty sure that nobody on this thread has suggested that the crew members should not be paid.

[not-enough-cruising]

5 minutes ago, dianajo67 said:

Virtually every staff member I’ve talked to is married and has a family with children or elderly parents they are responsible for back home.  A living wage isn’t just about the employee.  It’s about the employee and his/her dependents in this case.  Most of these folks are trading time away from their loved ones for the ability to hopefully improve the standard of living for their children back home.  Some may even want to send their kids to college someday.  I’m retired Air Force.  Based on the logic I’m seeing in this thread, I should not be paid when I am deployed because I’m being provided a place to eat and sleep.  Very narrow views that folks should just be happy with the potentially squalid living in their homelands and not be compensated for “deploying” in such a way they can have an improved life once returning home.  Also, who says they don’t own homes they are paying for back “home?”

 

BTW.  Staff do pay for things such as internet, phone calls etc.

When you are deployed you are paid an agreed upon contractual amount, just like

the crew. (USAF here as well) 

 

The crew are making 2X-3X what they would at home doing the same type work. Their life is MUCH improved by this arrangement. 

[dianajo67]

2 minutes ago, time4u2go said:

I honestly don't understand how you came to this conclusion. I'm pretty sure that nobody on this thread has suggested that the crew members should not be paid.

I never said that anyone said they shouldn’t be paid.  I just think there are some pretty relevant issues being left out of the discussion of what constitutes a living way.  It’s not personal.

[dianajo67]

Just now, not-enough-cruising said:

When you are deployed you are paid an agreed upon contractual amount, just like

the crew. (USAF here as well) 

 

The crew are making 2X-3X what they would at home doing the same type work. Their life is MUCH improved by this arrangement. 

I agree.  Just don’t want to forget that the wages don’t just support the individual in most cases.

[not-enough-cruising]

1 minute ago, dianajo67 said:

I agree.  Just don’t want to forget that the wages don’t just support the individual in most cases.

Agreed, this elevated income on the ships helps the entire family. 

[broberts]

38 minutes ago, not-enough-cruising said:

The crew are making 2X-3X what they would at home doing the same type work. Their life is MUCH improved by this arrangement. 

 

A very colonial attitude. 

[nferr]

4 hours ago, yogimax said:

Afraid of directly answering the question I see.

 

bunk beds... shared cabin

no windows

120 square feet

Wow, that’s sure luxurious!

 

 

 

 

Plus they don't live on the ship year round. A lot of them are married and have kids and homes to pay for. Some people are ridiculous on this board.